Re: Regression with ZFS on recent current

on 17/10/2012 20:24 Guido Falsi said the following:
> Hi!
> 
> While testing portshaker I found a regression in latest current.
> 
> portshaker depends on ZFS(when enabling ZFS support) remounting
> filesystems on the fly when changing the mountpoint property. This is
> working as expected on 9.x while on 10-current is not working. Problem
> has appeared sometime before October 3rd.

Can you clarify what you mean but this date?
That the problem didn't exist in head until recently?  Can you name a date when
the problem didn't exists in head then?

> Here is some sample output from a9.x machine and a 10-current one:
> 
> root_at_micro:~ [0]# uname -a
> FreeBSD micro.madpilot.net 9.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 9.1-PRERELEASE #0
> r239180: Sat Aug 11 00:14:47 CEST 2012
> root_at_micro.madpilot.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/MICRO  amd64
> root_at_micro:~ [0]# zfs create tank/test
> root_at_micro:~ [0]# touch /test/baz
> root_at_micro:~ [0]# zfs set mountpoint=/foo tank/test
> root_at_micro:~ [0]# ls -ld /foo
> drwxr-xr-x  2 root  wheel  3 Oct 17 19:18 /foo
> root_at_micro:~ [0]# ls -l /foo/
> total 1
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  0 Oct 17 19:18 baz
> root_at_micro:~ [0]# zfs list tank/test
> NAME        USED  AVAIL  REFER  MOUNTPOINT
> tank/test   144K   826G   144K  /foo
> 
> 
> root_at_marvin:~ [0]# uname -a
> FreeBSD marvin.madpilot.net 10.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #7
> r241638: Wed Oct 17 14:33:18 CEST 2012
> root_at_marvin.madpilot.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/MARVIN  amd64
> root_at_marvin:~ [0]# zfs create tank/test
> root_at_marvin:~ [0]# touch /test/baz
> root_at_marvin:~ [0]# zfs set mountpoint=/foo tank/test
> root_at_marvin:~ [0]# ls -ld /foo
> ls: /foo: No such file or directory
> root_at_marvin:~ [1]# ls -l /foo/
> ls: /foo/: No such file or directory
> root_at_marvin:~ [1]# ls -ld /test
> drwxr-xr-x  2 root  wheel  3 Oct 17 19:19 /test
> root_at_marvin:~ [0]# zfs list tank/test
> NAME        USED  AVAIL  REFER  MOUNTPOINT
> tank/test    31K   240G    31K  /foo
> 
> 
> Is this known? is the new behavior expected?
> 
> Am I doing something stupid?
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 


-- 
Andriy Gapon